My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-20-2009 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2009
>
07-20-2009 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/31/2012 12:36:08 PM
Creation date
7/31/2012 12:35:58 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
194
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
` ' <br /> NIINUTES OF THE <br /> . ORONO PLANNING COMiVIISSION MEETING <br /> June 15,2009 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (09-3412 CORTNEY SCOTT LeNEAVE,360 WAK�FIELD ROAD,CONTINITED) <br /> the density. The land to the east consists of a golf course and to the north are larger lots. LeNeave <br /> - indicated he does not believe these lots will negatively impact the density in the area and that the total <br /> acreage for the lots would exceed two acres but would not be contiguous. LeNeave stated the spirit of <br /> the law in terms of density is being met. <br /> Kang asked if it is typical to require the minimum if the land is not contiguous. <br /> Gaffron stated to his lrnowledge the City has not granted a lot area variance to ereate a new lot except in <br /> two cases,and one situation was to get rid of the Stubbs Bay Marina in 1980 and the other was a contract <br /> agreement in the Minnetonka Bluffs area to allow for sewer. To approve this application without two <br /> acres contiguous would be very unusual and that it is his understanding the City's Comprehensive Plan <br /> also prohibits it. � <br /> Schoenzeit stated it appears the applicant has a good understanding of what is required for this proposal to <br /> be approved. <br /> Kang noted a fairly substantial driveway would be required and asked whether a wild life analysis would <br /> be conducted to determine the impact of the driveway on the wetlands. <br /> Gaffron stated the Wetland Conservation Act is the regulation the City,would look at and that the act does <br /> not get irito the issue of wild life. Gaffron indicated he does not feel that will be a major factor in the <br /> decision by the Watershed District. <br /> Schwingler asked if the manmade wetland would be treated differently. <br /> Turner stated the one wetland that is manmade may play a role in the quality of the wetland and that an <br /> analysis will need to be completed to look at the quality of the wetland and what improvements could be <br /> made to upgrade it. Turner stated overall,though,the two wetlands would be treated basically the same. <br /> Gaffron asked what type of wetlands they are. <br /> LeNeave stated it is a marshy land with cattails growing in it. <br /> Turner indicated the Watershed District indicates the smaller one is a Type V wetland and the north <br /> wetland a Type III. The City classifies the north wetland as a preserve and the smaller wetland is not <br /> identified on the City's map. <br /> Acting Chair Kang opened the public hearing at 7:15 p.m. <br /> There were no public comments regarding this application. <br /> Acting Chair Kang closed the public hearing at 7:15 p.m. <br /> Kang noted a number of permits would need to be obtained. Kang asked whether this application would <br /> need to go before the City Council. <br /> PAGE 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.